Re: [Social-discuss] PHP-Based GNU Social structure

[Carlo von Loesch]

Blaine Cook typeth:
| > actually optimized to do this job. There is a reason why chatrooms
| > are usually not implemented by HTTP POST orgies.
| 
| Actually, increasingly they are.

I've done my share of webchats myself, I used to run some of the
largest web chats in Germany ten years ago (although ten thousands
of people sounds harmless today), but using HTTP for that only makes
sense if the web browser is the chat client - not for interserver exchange
and distribution. Alright, it can be done. What for? Just because you
don't have to implement a routing layer, or use an existing one? Having
slow web servers in the mix of the whole system is a good idea?

| It's appalling, it's horrendous, but developers love the HTTP, and
| most importantly, it's massively successful. So the wisdom I've gained

The number of fail whales that I the not power user have seen makes me
wonder if a real backbone could have been even more successful.

| And isn't that the most important thing here? Do we want a highly
| tuned race-car of a P2P decentralized network that has no users, that
| concedes to Twitter and Facebook the bulk of users and their freedom?

I don't see people flocking to see a brand new Facebook lookalike,
but I can imagine people installing the blazing native social network
client that lets you do the things we used to do on Facebook in a
much more breathtaking and empowering way. And with all the headline
news on data breaches over the last years, they might actually
appreciate to hear, that such a desktop based social network application
doesn't just do nifty things such as sharing files with your friends -
it also keeps that data truly private. Something a server just doesn't
do.

| Or do we want a successful technology that empowers more people and
| promotes and extends freedom to them?

Yes, only it's not the one you mean.

| You're welcome to create something entirely new, but I'd suggest you
| start by mocking up some designs as to how your P2P network is meant

No thanks. Each one of us here has already some prototype or product
working. Just look at http://groups.fsf.org/wiki/Group:GNU_Social/Ideas
there is a broad choice of projects for each design approach to doing
this. Yes the web-based quickhacks lead the pack.

| to work /for users/, and not just geeks. The same applies to the

Users are still choosing Skype over web-based telephony. Why that?
Don't underestimate the power of a sleek desktop utility.. How many
Twitter users use desktop clients? How much do they enjoy Twitter
more than the regular users?

| usability of the underlying technology as far as your target
| technological audience is concerned (in this case, your audience is
| almost certainly web developers - c.f., GNU Social targeting PHP). The
| technology is important, but the usability and desirability of the end
| result is far more so. Ignore this at your peril.

I see quite some potential with the backend of GNUnet, the experience
in protocol design of PSYC/XMPP and several other nifty things that have
been thrown into the pool on this mailing list recently. Working out
the real thing looks very feasible in my eyes.

-- 
___ psyc://psyced.org/~lynX ___ irc://psyced.org/welcome ___
___ xmpp:address@hidden ____ https://psyced.org/PSYC/ _____